Not to beat a dead horse, but big numbers aren't inherently interesting to
describe.
There are integers bigger than any integer anyone has written down in any
form. This particular integer is large, but "consumable".
I guess I get tired of the "number of atoms in the observable universe"
comparis
Have you heard of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graham's_number ? It is
certainly far too large to write out the digits to, in fact the number
of digits in that number is too large to write
On 2016-01-31 8:19, John Tromp wrote:
dear Robert,
The number G19 of legal games under a given go rule
>
>
> I am pretty sure that such an implicit expression exists: it is << the
>> number of etc etc
>>
>
> We do not speak of just the definition of what kind of number to find, but
> of the construction of finding the number (or already of a compression of
> its explicit digits).
It's hard to
On 01.02.2016 11:11, Olivier Teytaud wrote:
I am pretty sure that such an implicit expression exists: it is << the
number of etc etc
We do not speak of just the definition of what kind of number to find,
but of the construction of finding the number (or already of a
compression of its exp
>
>
> How do you know that an implicit expression (of length smaller than 10^80)
> of the number does not exist? :)
>
I am pretty sure that such an implicit expression exists: it is << the
number of etc etc >> (formalized for your favorite set of rules :-) ).
--
==
> On 31 Jan 2016, at 16:05, Robert Jasiek wrote:
>
> For the yellow press: "The number of 10^80 atoms in the universe is much
> smaller than the number 2 * 10^170 of possible positions, which is very much
> smaller than the uncountable number of possible different games."
"much smaller" is a
On 31.01.2016 19:57, John Tromp wrote:
What is your best estimate of point where where chances are even?
I do not know.
what numbers the press could use that are not too arbitrary.
- The number P of legal positions.
- An empirical average number I of available intersections for the next
mo
dear Robert,
>> It will never be known since there's not enough space in the known
>> universe to write it down. We're talking about a number with over
>> 10^100 digits.
>
> How do you know that an implicit expression (of length smaller than 10^80)
> of the number does not exist? :)
Of course an
On 31.01.2016 17:19, John Tromp wrote:
It will never be known since there's not enough space in the known
universe to write it down. We're talking about a number with over
10^100 digits.
How do you know that an implicit expression (of length smaller than
10^80) of the number does not exist? :)
dear Robert,
> The number G19 of legal games under a given go ruleset is unknown.
It will never be known since there's not enough space in the known
universe to write it down. We're talking about a number with over
10^100 digits.
> For positional
> superko (prohibition of recreation of the same
10 matches
Mail list logo
